Review: Sad Cypress

/ rtrube54 / 2 Comments
Cover image of "Sad Cypress" by Agatha Christie

Sad Cypress

Sad Cypress (Hercule Poirot, 21) Agatha Christie. William Morrow Paperbacks (ISBN: 9780063376151) 2025, first published 1940.

Summary: Elinor Carlisle is on trial for poisoning Mary Gerrard and will go to her death unless Poirot can show that someone else did it.

Elinor Carlisle is standing in the dock, charged with the murder by poisoning of Mary Gerrard, her lodgekeeper’s daughter. She pleads not guilty but the preponderance of evidence weighs against her. But the family physician has hired Hercule Poirot to investigate, and to find evidence that will exonerate her.

The back story, which Christie proceeds to tell is that Elinor Carlisle and Roddy Welman, are engaged to marry. Elinor is the niece of Laura Welman, whose health is failing. Roddy is Mrs. Welman’s deceased husband’s nephew. The two grew up in frequent contact, a relationship which had grown into love, at least for Elinor. Mrs Welman had always wanted this marriage. Both Roddy and Elinor had been living in London when an anonymous note is delivered to Elinor, warning of someone stealing the affections of Mrs. Welman in her illness.

When Mrs Welman has a stroke, they visit. Elinor finds Mary Gerrard, the lodgekeeper’s daughter has been keeping Mrs Welman company and helping the nurses care for her. For some reason, Mrs. Welman had taken an interest in Mary, and had paid for her education, including a finishing school in Paris. Mary is modest, and simply professes gratitude for the treatment she has received. And Mrs. Welman appreciates the company.

All may have been well and good were it not for a chance encounter between Roddy and Mary. He is immediately smitten, though Mary discourages him. Elinor sees this and it leads to the breaking of their engagement. Even then, when Roddy presses his suit, Mary discourages him. But Elinor is secretly heartbroken, and jealous of Roddy’s attentions to Mary.

Mrs. Welman, who detests being bedridden, has a second stroke. Despite surviving and improving, she dies overnight. About this time, nurse Hopkins mentions a missing vial of morphine fromn her bag to the other nurse. But there is no reason to see the death as having been from other than natural causes.

When Elinor meets with the solicitor, she learns Mrs Welman had died intestate, and that she has inherited the estate. Nothing goes to Roddy. Mrs. Welman had been distraught the night before she died and wanted her solicitor to make a provision for Mary, something she had been unable to do. Elinor settled £2000 on Mary. And she decided to sell the manor, asking Mary to clean out the lodgekeepers residence.

Meanwhile, Elinor wrapped up matters at the main house and made sandwiches from supplies she had picked up at the grocer, more than she could eat. So, she went down and invited Mary and nurse Hopkins to join her. When they sat down, she served Mary first, who took the top sandwich. Afterward, nurse Hopkins made tea that she and Mary drank. Then nurse Hopkins and Elinor went upstairs to look through some things. When they finally came down, they found Mary breathing with difficulty. Despite the doctor’s efforts, she died.

They found a lethal dose of morphine in her stomach. Since both Mary and nurse Hopkins drank the tea, the focus was on the sandwich she ate. Then a scrap of paper with the word “morphine” was found in the floorboard where Elinor had prepared the sandwiches.

It doesn’t appear anyone else but Elinor could have done it. She had motive, means (the missing morphine vial) and opportunity. But she maintained her innocence (even as she imagined she could have done it). And Dr. Lord believes her and seeks Poirot’s help. But will he find evidence that points elsewhere when the preponderance points at Elinor? Or will she go to the gallows?

In the end it comes down hidden secrets and small mistakes, things Poirot is skilled at ferreting out. But Christie made the evidence against Elinor seem so convincing that I wondered how Poirot could prove otherwise. And that’s what kept me glued to the story to the end.

Review: Early Christian Theology

/ rtrube54 / 4 Comments
Cover image of "Early Christian Theology" by J. Warren Smith

Early Christian Theology

Early Christian Theology, J. Warren Smith. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co. (ISBN: 9780802874771) 2026.

Summary: A guide to the development of early Christian theology emphasizing diverse attempts to understand scripture.

One of the texts we used during my seminary education was J. N. D. Anderson’s Early Christian Doctrine. It was an important text helping me understand the centuries of debate behind the creeds we recited in church and the beliefs about Christ, about the Trinity, original sin, and the atonement that I took for granted. Anderson’s book was published in 1960. J. Warren Smith, professor of historical theology at Duke Divinity School, thought it was time for an update. His approach stresses how the theological debates of the early Christian centuries reflected the different readings of scripture in different Christian communities, wrestling with complex questions about the person of Christ and the nature of the Godhead. The challenge of the councils was to address those readings, resisting relativism while constructing a framework of belief that incorporated the best of those readings.

Smith’s focus is on the second through fifth centuries. The book combines chronological and thematic coverage, so that some chapters will recur to an earlier period to discuss a different theological theme. Smith begins with the foundations of scripture and worship in early Christian communities. While this is uppermost, he also weighs the influences of classical culture. Then he turns to the challenges of persecution and the early Christian apologists. This is followed by responses to the gnostic challenge.

Then chapters 4-6 turn to responding to various Christological errors including the formidable challenge from Arius and his followers, culminating in the councils of the fourth century. While there were politics and powerful personalities, what is also evident is the church’s struggle to find language to crystallize its understanding of the data of scripture concerning both Christ and the Trinity.

Chapter 7 addresses Pneumatology including the critical work of the Cappadocians affirming the divinity of the Spirit and the eventual division over filioque. Likewise, chapter 8 on the incarnation also reflects the differences between east and west, as well as conflicts among eastern churches. The remaining chapters (9-14) address early concepts of the atonement, ecclesiology, particularly in North Africa, the Manichaean conflict over creation and evil, divine and human agency, deification, and early eschatology.

I was struck with several differences from Anderson. One is that the treatment of the church’s controversies was far more in-depth and nuanced. In addition, Smith helps us understand how the controversies were based in widespread communities. We see Rome in conversation with Constantinople, Alexandria with Antioch. Theological differences weren’t abstract conversations but based in believing communities. Smith helps us understand the different concerns that shaped the way different communities read scripture and formulated doctrine.

Given the mix of chronological and thematic material, a timeline might have been helpful. In addition, particularly around the discussions of Christology, charts that summarized the major tenets of key figures or movements would help. I would recommend that students using this text create their own versions of this. As a survey text, Smith offers bibliographies of primary and secondary sources for further study.

In conclusion, Smith aspired to create a worthy successor to Anderson’s book. I believe he has succeeded in that work, incorporating more recent scholarship. In addition, he helped me see theology as an ongoing conversation between Christian communities. Sure, it was messy and individuals were not always at their best. Would that we had the sense of the global community reading scripture together to understand the mind of the Maker.

_____________

Disclosure of Material Connection: I received a complimentary copy of this book from the publisher for review.

The Weekly Wrap: October 4-10

/ rtrube54 / Leave a comment
woman in white crew neck t shirt sitting on chair
Photo by cottonbro studio on Pexels.com

The Weekly Wrap: October 4-10

Reviewing Backlist Books

I do something atypical for a reviewer. While I read many new titles, I also read a number of backlist books–those that have been in publication anywhere from a year to several centuries or more. C.S. Lewis recommended we read one old book for every new one we read. I cannot say I do that. However, there are many older books that I want to read, as well as ones I learn of.

I am a reader first. Reviewing is something I began because others found the reviews I wrote helpful. My primary motive was just to remember the important things about the books I read and what I thought. But I discovered that at least some others valued what I wrote. And I was fortunate to persuade a number of publishers to send me books I was interested in. For free, no less!

But I will always be a reader first. That means I will keep discovering great old books as well as new ones. My hunch is that there are many others like me. They aren’t guided by the current book club books or the best-sellers. They simply pursue what they think of interest.

Perhaps it will be to read all of what an author writes. Or a book you are reading (or several) mention an influential book you’ve never read. Then there are those serendipitous finds at a library booksale or a secondhand bookstore. All those kinds of books will turn up in my reviews. Hopefully some will interest you. If nothing else, I hope it encourages you in the adventure of the reading life, discovering books new and old.

Five Articles Worth Reading

This year’s Nobel Prize in literature went to Canadian poet Anne Carson. If you are like me, you are new to Anne Carson. If so, “An Anne Carson Reader” is just the place to begin.

Carson is a classicist as well as a poet. “Anne Carson’s Seductive Strangeness” explores the intersection of those two worlds in her life and work.

In “Flowers for Frank,” Noah Swank reviews In the Realm of the Last Man, the new memoir by Francis Fukuyama. In particular, he explores why Fukuyama writes so much about his hobbies. For example: “The third chapter details Fukuyama’s lifelong experience woodworking, and the fifth gives us his thoughts on sports and music. The tenth is about art photography; the twelfth about woodworking again; the 25th about building computers.”

It seems we are endlessly fascinated with King Arthur and Arthurian legends. Angelica Frey explores “Why King Arthur Still Shapes Pop Culture.”

Finally, “Children of the Wasted Lands” explores why the stories we choose to read and heed are so important in shaping our lives.

Quote of the Week

Vaclav Havel was born on October 5, 1936. He observes the folly of thinking we can only lie once when he states,


“Lying can never save us from another lie.”

Miscellaneous Musings

The Cathedral of Theology is part of a new series published by IVP Academic, the “Pillars of Christian Dogmatics.” The metaphor of likening the framing of a theology to the building of a cathedral is arresting. I look forward to seeing if the book fulfills the promise of the title.

Elizabeth Strout continues to impress me with her depth of insight into the human condition. I’m midway through The Things We Never Say, a fascinating exploration of the secrets we keep and the lies we live to cover them.

Patrick Wensick’s The Great Black Swamp is a history/memoir of the northwest quadrant of Ohio, which was largely a swamp until drained, beginning in the late 1800’s, leaving some of the richest, and flattest farmland anywhere in the world. Wensick grew up in one of the small towns that sprang up there, Deshler. I lived for four years in Toledo, and drove all over this area, which is basically endless fields of corn and soybeans, with only a drainage ditch separating the road and the fields. Those drainage ditches and their ecological impact form a major part of this narrative.

Next Week’s Reviews

Monday: J. Warren Smith, Early Christian Theology

Tuesday: Agatha Christie, Sad Cypress

Wednesday: Jill Lepore, The Rise and Fall of the Artificial State

Thursday: Ericka Anderson, Freely Sober

Friday: Lynneth Miller Renberg and Adam R. Renberg, Candles in the Darkness

So, that’s The Weekly Wrap for October 4-10.

Find past editions of The Weekly Wrap under The Weekly Wrap heading on this page.

Review: The Righteous Mind

/ rtrube54 / Leave a comment
Cover image of "The Righteous Mind" by Jonathan Haidt

The Righteous Mind

The Righteous Mind. Jonathan Haidt. Pantheon Books (ISBN: 9780307377906) 2012.

Summary: Why different political and religious groups have such different beliefs about what is right and wrong.

All I need to do is scroll through my social media feeds to see how moral people have very different understandings of how to bring their religious beliefs to bear on public life, including politics. Just compare the vibe on X (formerly Twitter) and Threads. Furthermore, engaging across those differences seems virtually impossible. Why can’t reasonable people come to a meeting of the minds?

In The Righteous Mind, Jonathan Haidt examines the moral psychology behind our deepest divisions. The first part of the book shares a breakthrough in his own thinking, confirmed by research, that explains why good, rational people disagree. He discovered that moral intuitions related to gut feelings come first. Then conscious reasons follow in a post hoc fashion. We use reasons to justify our intuitions. He uses the analogy of a rider and an elephant. The elephant is our intuitions, the rider our reason. The elephant goes where it wants and the rider tends to justify where it went. In this case, the elephants rule. However, it was interesting to learn that when people were given time to rationally consider a moral situation rather than just react, reason played a more determinative role. Otherwise, intuition rules the day. You need to speak to the elephant, or even address the path.

The second part begins with observing that liberal-progressives are WEIRD. That is, Western, educated, industrialized, rich, and democratic. When he was at Penn, he discovered that a two block walk to a local McDonald’s revealed people who reasoned from very different moral foundations. He recognized that there was more to morality than the WEIRD embrace of care (vs. harm) and fairness (vs. cheating). He eventually identified three additional moral foundations on which conservatives drew for their moral intuitions: loyalty/betrayal, authority/subversion, and sanctity/degradation. Eventually, he identified one more foundation they shared: liberty/oppression. This both helped explain the divides but also why conservatives enjoyed certain advantages.

The last part of the book looks at group behavior, something Haidt calls “the hive switch.” He argues on the basis of evolutionary biology that we are drawn to groupish behavior, transcending self-interest. Furthermore, groups practice binding rituals through music, movement, dance and more. The morality of the group both binds us to each other and blinds us to those not part of the group. This explains religion, sports fans, music group followers, and politics.

The explanation of evolutionary biology was the densest part of the book and seemed crucial to the third part of the book, which I felt cohered the least. It seemed speculative to me. More helpful were the descriptions of how groups bind and how this blinds us to others.

The book doesn’t say a particular group is better or worse. What Haidt does is help us understand how we are different and the different foundations that shape our moral intuitions. While conservatives emphasize three more than others, we all draw upon all six to greater or lesser extents. While it won’t resolve differences, finding common ground with someone we differ with is a place to begin. Also, the realization that all have moral foundations engenders respect as opposed to deprecation.

What the book doesn’t address is the justification of immoral actions on moral terms or deviations from a group’s moral foundations. What happens when progressives cheat? Or what happens when conservatives subvert institutional authority? Real politicians (or church leaders, for that matter) do not always act morally even by their own standards. What Haidt does help us see is how we use reasons in a post hoc fashion, but this involves a redefinition of fairness or authority. But Haidt doesn’t speak to the erosion of moral foundations. Perhaps he will one day write a sequel on the unrighteous mind.

Review: A Fatal Glass of Beer

/ rtrube54 / Leave a comment
Cover image of "A Fatal Glass of Beer" by Stuart Kaminsky

A Fatal Glass of Beer

A Fatal Glass of Beer (Toby Peters, 20) Stuart M. Kaminsky. MysteriousPress.com/Open Road (ISBN: 9781453247525) 2012, first published 1997.

Summary: Toby Peters is hired by W.C. Fields to find the imposter emptying Fields’ bank accounts across the country.

In number 20 in the series, Hollywood detective Toby Peters is hired by W.C. Fields to find the person emptying Fields’ bank accounts. As Fields travelled across the country, he opened accounts under names like Otis J. Raisincluster, Quigley E. Sneersight, and Cormorant Beecham III. All told, he had about a million dollars in those different accounts. Now, someone has stolen about half of the bank books associated with the accounts and is withdrawing the funds.

So, he hires Toby Peters to catch up to the thief and recover the money. But he doesn’t leave it at that. He wants to accompany Peters. That’s where Gunther Whertman, who we met in Murder on the Yellow Brick Road comes in. Peter hires him to drive Fields’ Cadillac. What results is a madcap adventure across the country beginning in Philadelphia. In a note, the thief identifies himself as Lester O. Hipnoodle, and through a police friend, they find his apartment in Philadelphia. But no Hipnoodle. Only a note where he is going to strike next.

Oddly, although it seems Hipnoodle wants them to follow, a caller warns them not to, on danger of death. But that doesn’t deter Fields, who has survived his share of scrapes, as Peters will hear. However, Hipnoodle outfoxes them at each bank, using a fake ID and the bank book to empty the account, leaving a clue to where he would hit next. As they pursue, they are pursued by someone they identify as “The Chimp” and the threats become real. Is one person behind all this, they wonder?

The story portrays Fields as dauntless, one who doesn’t suffer fools gladly, yet generous. Also, he often thinks he is funnier than he is. But the combination of Fields, Gunther, and Peters makes for great fun. Meanwhile, the dentist he shares an office with yields to move Peters and his receptionist out.

In sum, this isn’t great detective fiction, although there are some interesting plot twists. Rather, this is just a fun, cross-country romp.

Review: Practicing Radical Advent

/ rtrube54 / Leave a comment
Cover image of "practicing Radical Advent" by Laurie Brink, OP

Practicing Radical Advent

Practicing Radical Advent, Laurie Brink, OP, Dianne Bergant, CSA. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co. (ISBN: 9780802885265) 2026.

Summary: In seasons of imminent change, a guide to holy waiting infused with God’s presence and promise.

The season of Advent, preceding Christmas, is not the only time in our lives when we wait. Seasons of waiting populate our lives. Applying for college and awaiting admission. Sensing it is time to change jobs, or even career direction, but not quite sure to what yet. Preparing for marriage or the birth of one’s first child. Experiencing loss and waiting with our grief to see what life will hold subsequently.

Laurie Brink, OP has written this book as a guide for how we might wait in such times of transition. She calls navigating this liminal space “radical advent”:

“I call this liminal space radical advent, which is first and foremost a holy waiting, infused with God’s presence and promise. The term “radical,” coming from the Latin word for “root,” reflects the deeply rooted nature of this liminal space and time. We are not talking about waiting to check out at the grocery store. Radical advent is serious waiting–waiting for your test results, waiting to hear good news, waiting beside the bed of a loved one. Radical advent is the waiting that accompanies the profound moments of transition in our lives” (p. 4).

Brink proposes eight “stepping stones” as we wait through times of transition. The first is to look for and respond to God’s invitation, as Abram did, when he went to the land God would show him. Then secondly, we choose to go forward, as Naomi and Ruth did in their partnership of hesed.

Third, is discerning a new vocation, as Peter did in the boat as he falls at Jesus feet and Jesus invites him to fish for people. To say “yes” to a new vocation is to go deeper in friendship with God. But, fourthly, a new vocation often means crossing boundaries. It did for Jesus and the Samaritan woman, as they enter “into another’s garden,” resulting in faith for many in Samaria. Likewise, new vocations and boundary crossing lead to the fifth stepping stone of counting the costs. It may mean leaving a place we’ve called “home” for we know not what.

Not only do we leave home. We also recognize the destination, the sixth stepping stone. Specifically, for the follower of Jesus, that destination is always “Jerusalem” in some form. In some way, we will embrace the call to lose our lives for Christ’s sake. Seventh, the call to follow Jesus is a call to become reconciled. Through Christ, we are reconciled to God, who no longer counts our trespasses against us. But that also means that we reconcile with those we’ve wronged. Finally, our new situation means crossing the eighth stepping stone of changed expectations. For example, Mary of Magdala did not expect the death of the one who had healed her. Then, when she went to the tomb, expecting to anoint a dead body, she did not expect to encounter Jesus alive, until he called her name.

Brink devotes a chapter to each of the stepping stones, including relevant biblical narratives and personal commentary. Then she offers prompts for reflecting and a four step process of reading, reflecting, responding, and returning.

This is not a traditional book on the Season of Advent. Rather, it is about all the “Advents” of our lives and how we might both await and respond to all the “comings” of the Lord to us. Change is not always something we like. But change happens. The “stepping stones” of this book position us to experience change as a sacred encounter. And it assures us that in change, God wants to meet us afresh and deepen our relationship with Him.

_____________

Disclosure of Material Connection: I received a complimentary copy of this book from the publisher for review.